| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Job Creation (London)
13. Mr. Andrew Love (Edmonton): What is his estimate of the number of jobs created in London since May 1997. [112227]
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Miss Melanie Johnson): The UK economy is continuing to expand and create new employment. Since the general election, 140,000 new jobs have been created in London.
Mr. Love: I thank my hon. Friend for that reply and congratulate the Government on their success in creating a vibrant economy in the capital. In the past year, unemployment in my constituency has gone down by 7 per cent. and the latest estimate is that around 150,000 new jobs will be created in the coming year. Does my hon. Friend agree that, in the very unlikely event of the Conservatives being returned at the next general election,
they would squander that golden legacy of the past three years with a return to the boom and bust of the 1980s and early 1990s?
Miss Johnson: I entirely agree with my hon. Friend about what would happen were the Conservatives to be returned at the next general election. He talked about their record of boom and bust and the two recessions for which they were responsible. Almost 2 million jobs were lost in the UK during the recession in the 1980s and a similar number were lost in the 1990s recession. The Conservatives would abolish the new deal, which has so benefited my hon. Friend's constituency, as well as those of many Conservative Members. The right hon. Member for Kensington and Chelsea (Mr. Portillo) has seen a fall of nearly 64 per cent. in youth unemployment in his constituency as a result of Government policies that he does not support and would end.
Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood): Does the hon. Lady agree that the ability of the economy in London to create and sustain prosperity and jobs depends on a low-tax regime from local and national government? Will she assure the House that the withholding tax on the savings income of European Union citizens in the City of London will be vetoed, so that it goes away for good? Why has the Paymaster General not published the report
on so-called unfair tax competition, which she drafted at the behest of the European Union? The competitiveness of the City of London depends on a highly favourable tax regime, which many in the European Union would like to destroy.
Miss Johnson: My hon. Friend the Paymaster General has indeed published the report to which the hon. Gentleman referred and it is now in the public domain. I agree with the hon. Gentleman on just one of the points that he made. We continue to defend Britain's interests in the matter of the withholding tax, as we said we would do. I share the hon. Gentleman's views on that, but with regard to the economy in London, I remind him that there have been 800,000 new jobs across the country, 140,000 of which are in London, and that a record 3.3 million people are employed in London. I can attribute that only to the Government's excellent policies--the new deal, the national minimum wage, the working families tax credit--which provide the right framework for job creation through stability and meeting our inflation target. The hon. Gentleman should look at the record of his own party and ask himself how it was that the Tories presided over so much unemployment and so many periods of boom and bust. Who would trust the Tories again with the economy? The British people know that the Labour party and the Labour Government can be trusted to run UK plc.
Business of the House
12.31 pm
Sir George Young (North-West Hampshire): Will the Leader of the House give us the business for next week?
The President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mrs. Margaret Beckett): The business for next week will be as follows:
Monday 13 March--Progress on remaining stages of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Bill.
Tuesday 14 March--Conclusion of remaining stages of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Bill.
At 10 o'clock the House will be asked to agree the spring supplementary estimates, supplementary vote on account, excess votes and defence votes A.
Wednesday 15 March--Proceedings on the Consolidated Fund (No.2) Bill.
Remaining stages of the Terrorism Bill.
Motion on the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary, Provisions) Act 1989 (Continuance) Order.
Thursday 16 March--Opposition Day [8th Allotted Day]. Until about 4 o'clock, there will be a debate entitled "The Government's Handling of the Mozambique Crisis" followed by a debate entitled "The Protection of Green Fields and the Imposition of House Building Targets". Both debates will arise on Opposition motions.
Friday 17 March--Debate on safeguards for children on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
The provisional business for the following week will be as follows:
Monday 20 March--Second Reading of the Countryside and Rights of Way Bill.
Tuesday 21 March--My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will open his Budget statement.
The Chairman of Ways and Means is expected to name opposed private business for consideration at 7 o'clock.
Wednesday 22 March--Continuation of the Budget debate.
Thursday 23 March--Continuation of the Budget debate.
Friday 24 March--Private Members' Bills.
Monday 27 March--Conclusion of the Budget debate.
Sir George Young:
The House is grateful for next week's business and an indication of the business for the following week. Following my comments last week, I am grateful for the additional time that the Government have found for the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Bill. The other place has debated the Wakeham report, but there is still no sign of progress at this end of the building. When will we get the promised Joint Committee on which the Government appear to be dragging their feet? When will we have the opportunity to debate the Wakeham report--a debate during which we hope the Government will clarify whether peerages are offered to so-called opposition parties on condition that they do not oppose?
Has the right hon. Lady had time to read the excellent report of the Liaison Committee on shifting the balance between Select Committees and the Executive? Does she agree that we should debate it on the Floor of the House? Does she recall that we still have not debated the Procedure Committee report on scrutinising public expenditure?
The right hon. Lady has confirmed the date of the Budget and the four-day debate. Can she tell us when the Finance Bill will be published? Are not our debates on the economy and public expenditure a bit like buses? We do not see one for months and then four come along at the same time. Is the right hon. Lady satisfied that the incidence of economic and public expenditure debates throughout the year is satisfactory?
Finally, so that members of staff can plan their lives, has the right hon. Lady anything interesting to say about the dates of the Whitsun recess?
Mrs. Beckett:
First, I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his remarks. The Government have indeed found the extra time he asked for last week for the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Bill, and I am grateful to him for acknowledging that. He asked me last week about the possibility of a debate on the Wakeham report and the setting up of a Joint Committee, and I made the point to him then--and I am afraid that I can only reiterate it--that of course the Government have to give priority to their legislative programme and will do so. That means that at present I cannot give him a date for that debate.
The right hon. Gentleman suggests that there is some evidence of a deal being done in terms of behaviour in the House in return for peerages. First, as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made plain yesterday, he has given more peerages already to the Liberal Democrats than did the previous Prime Minister. [Interruption.] It is no good Opposition Members making those noises. We all know that the creation of peerages is within the patronage of the Prime Minister, and this one is the first to give any of it up. Secondly, the right hon. Gentleman has only to look at the voting record in the House of Lords to see that it shows no evidence of any kind of deal.
The right hon. Gentleman asked me about a debate on the Floor of the House about the Liaison Committee report. Like the Lords debate, that will have to wait, but it is a matter to which the Government will give serious consideration, because it is a weighty and serious report. Similarly, I am aware of the need at some point to debate the Procedure Committee's report.
I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman the date of the publication of the Finance Bill, but I hope to do so shortly. I take heed of his remarks about the balance of economic and public expenditure debates. I fear that I cannot give him the dates for the Whitsun recess either, although I can confirm that we will not sit on the bank holiday.
Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West):
When can we debate the important research that has been published in the past few weeks in Nature from scientists in south Carolina, London and Aberdeen, which proves that cannabis products can relieve the symptoms of multiple sclerosis in minutes? Another group of scientists have found proof that cannabinoids can destroy brain tumours that remain unaffected by conventional treatment such as chemotherapy. Those discoveries should cause us to end
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |